Ballistics 243 105 amax, 25-06 117 sst

[runtohunt]

I hope hunting season starts soon. :?

 

[jmad_81]

I hope hunting season starts soon. :?

No kidding :roll:

 

[onesonek]

My intent is to capsize wive's tells and expose those who talk out of their azz.

Obama and Pellosi have 20 more years of political experience than me...... does that make them right? 20 more years of experience doesn't give you anything on me..... except more useless experience.

You know,,,,I have never tried to inject such sarcasm on you or anybody else for that matter, unless it came at me first. But what this prove's,,,,,, Like Obama and Pelosi, if someone disagree's with your thought's or rather points out another train of thought, you come unglued and start bashing.
Are you that pompous in person, or is it the anonymity of the net that brings out such foolishness?

Once a bullet starts to expand.... the SD is out the window, as it is constantly changing due to increase in frontal area, and decrease in bullet mass. There is no way to predict what an expanding bullet will do.... nor what it's SD will be from inch to inch as it passes through a critter.

Honestly, I have found NPT's quite predictable. Still, SD is a gauge one can use, yet different construction designs will have different influences and results. While the terminal SD does change, it is still predictable to some extent. Of which you show in your next paragraph.


A solid will have roughly the same SD through it's entire trip..... so that's why it was created and originally used.

SD wasn't created, it's a measurement of simple physics,(or mathmatical law?). I still haven't figured out where SD, solely pertains to solids or that is it's only application. I would like to see some proof or resource of that.

A 90 grain Barnes (SD .218) will out penetrate the 115 Partition (SD .249) every time (even though the SD and energy are lower). how is that possible?

Pretty much my point all along,,,tougher bullet and with higher weight retention, or better penetrating qualites in general.

I ain't speculating there..... nor on the use of SD as a reference tool....

No not speculating, just losing the discussion of construction making a difference, of which you just noted yourself.

25% less..... and 30% more are the same thing here..... just depends on if you're looking for less or more....My faith in the Amax..... comes from field experience..... more than I can say for the naysayers...... as they've never actual shot one. High BC ain't everything....... it's just better than a Nosler Soup Can.

Well, you know what they say about opinion's. Although I'm not quite sure why you hang on the Nolser forum with that statement,,,,unless it's to purposely stir the pot?




If the bullet works for the job..... I'll take as much BC as I can get.

That is all fine and good for you. I just think sometimes lately (10-15 yrs or more),,far too much emphasis is put on the value of BC's. I'm not saying you can have too high of BC and they don't have value, but it is easy to have too little penetration in some circumstances, when using a lightly constructed bullet.



A higher BC lets you control more of the "variables" than a low BC. Onesonek (and those in the controlled expansion peanut gallery) want's to influence the "variables" AFTER impact.

More sarcasm typical of too many (specially more so of the younger generation), when other's see things in another manner. If you don't understand that, refer to the BO/NP response.
As for "control",,,I will contend we control absolutely nothing. We can make choices and decisions, that may or may not have different outcome's or consequense's. We just strive to do the best we can in all thing's,,,,well, hopefully so.

I want to influence them BEFORE impact..... as a "newcomer"..... you decide which you'd rather do. I prefer placing a good bullet in an excellent place..... I recon some put an excellent bullet in a questionable place (then expect the bullet to make up the difference).

Why is it if not done your way,,,,it's your assumption someone else is making bad shot placement's.
I have to question again, if you would be so smug and childish in person?
Quite honestly, I'm totally begining to also question your stated experience, as you tend to sound more and more like a wetnosed teen that didn't get his butt beat enough when he was pre-adolescent. Or in otherwords,,,a whinning wannabe comes to mind.
I also have to tell ya, smartassed little pricks like you, are making it tough to take seriously, and tough on the forums in general as well. And if not just me, I know it's difficult to even visit forums anymore.

Post impact is what does the work,,,,Your and my influence is toast, once the trigger is squeezed. Mother Nature can be pretty gnarly after that. Wind gust's and lull's, updrafts, downdrafts, etc., and animals can move. All are factors after your's or my fundamental's and choices are in play. While a higher BC will give you a little more margin for error at long range, it don't eliminate all the issues, and reallly isn't a factor at most normal ranges. As I have said before,,,,in my observation's over the years, the vast majority can't hold the 25-30% difference at the ranges you are proposing. And it seems more prevalent now days.
Just remember, even the with the best intention's in both those aspects, thing's can go unexpected in 1/2 the time it takes for the bullet to get there.
I also know some will make bad decision's on the shot,,,, but regardless of bullet construction and or caliber..

243 is more than adequate for anything I'd (or anyone else would) ever point a sub-7mm rifle at (deer, bears, pronghorn, caribou, coyotes, liberals, whatever).

You can say "more", I will say barely, and let it go at that, as it is a matter of choice. But in that all around rifle,,,"sub 7mm" context, I don't know one guide/professional, that carries for his own use, a .243/6mm for any mentoned, with the exception of the coyotes. That's not saying there might be some I haven't known, just seems an extreme rarity in my experience and knowledge.


That's the point here, we're not discussing dangerous game rifles..... we're discussing one small pill vs. another.....

Indeed, but then there is Murphy's Law.

I ain't sending it to jack a rhino.

Now to the rest of you all, I apologize for my loss of civility! Point, counter point, and rebuttal are great for learning. I just am having issue taking the sarcasm, innuendos, insinuations and disparaging counter's any longer. Unfortunately then it becomes, what comes around, goes around.
It's not that I'm thin skinned,,,,,,and it's not that I'm think I'm always right. Lord knows that ain't so, and I have caught myself at times too,,,not to mention a few others have pointed out as well. I have just grown very tired of this stuff for quite some time. I know I have a choice to read and or participate here and eleswhere, or not too. And it just may come to that.

 

[onesonek]

Some of the forum members hunt in thick woods where a long shot is going to be 75 yards; do they use a high BC bullet or does a stout heavy Partition/ bonded bullet that gives them the best chance on a deer that they will see between trees for a couple seconds? There may be brush the bullet has to pass through before it gets to the animal. Does your Amax still make the most sense?

If your intention is just to come on here and "stir the pot"...go troll somewhere else.

If you are shooting "through brush"..... you shouldn't be shooting.

If you are snap shooting at deer "between the trees for a couple seconds"... you shouldn't be shooting.

If you cannot, with absolute certainty, place a bullet through the clockwork..... you shouldn't be shooting.

Sorry man..... but that's how I see it. And, I find it incredibly ironic.... that in order to protect the "newbie", and promote that great "just in case" attitude.... we've now gone to advocating shooting at stuff through brush, snap shooting at deer, and generally depending on a bullet to make up the difference.... all in order to discredit a bullet that has already earned accolades afield. Awesome!

I didnt see where he said he did or advotcated any of those you mentioned,,,,only that where they hunt it's thick enough to limit shots to 75 yds. Not trying to discredit anything, rather inform of the cons as well the pros. What's ironic, is you can't read, or I should say ,,,comprehend.

"we've now gone to advocating shooting at stuff through brush, snap shooting at deer"
Your assumption's again,,,,

 

[usmc 89]

nevermind, LONG LIVE THE KING!

 

[SJB358]

WOW.. I am not sure what is left to say. We all shoot different rifles and cartridges. Thank God we have that choice. Trying to convince one another of which is better. Well, that is like trying to convince a Ford guy that Chevy is better.

If you are snap shooting at deer "between the trees for a couple seconds"... you shouldn't be shooting.

Just my thoughts on this SD, but if you have ever hunted in the East, you would know that shooting a running deer, either being pushed by hounds or drivers pushing a thicket, you only get a shot at a moving or running deer, 75% of the time. If you can't stop them, you rely on your skills as a riflemen to make the shot. They are not usually broadside standing shots, and most are under 75 yards most of the time. They happen all year long and if you practice even a little bit, hits are pretty easy, but having enough gun to capitalize on the shots really makes a pretty big difference. It might not be your style, but alot of us on here hunt in both the East and West. Big difference in the tactics applied.


If you cannot, with absolute certainty, place a bullet through the clockwork..... you shouldn't be shooting.

I think this applies to long range shots as well. Deer/Elk/bear takes a step as you are in the final ounces of final sight picture. Instead of the bullet landing the shoulder, it lands in the guts? Kinda the game. It is hunting and it does happen. I guess it has never happened to you, but you are probably an incredibly better hunter than me. I would rather have two holes in order to find, fix and finish the animal. Again, it is a bad shot with either bullet, but I think the chances of recovery are better with two leaking holes..

I am not saying the AMax is a bad bullet at all, but folks have a different vision of what should happen. I can say that I would feel pretty undergunned in the timber with a 243 and Amaxs, or PT's or whatever. 243 just isn't going to answer the mail up close with a steeply quartering shot. At least not my 243. We test our bullets to get an idea of how far they will penetrate. We use jugs, cardboard, phone books, etc to scale penetration. Nobody assumes that any of the media is going to represent an elk, buffalo, grizzly, but we can see the difference in how far each bullet penetrates. Then, with that info, you can tailor it to your chosen game. I wouldn't have a single issue with blasting deer with the 105 Amax. Shot plenty of deer with the 52 grain Speer out of my 22-250's. Worked fine on all of them, but they were perfect scenarios.

Again, if recoil bothers ya, I am all about using whatever rifle you shoot the best. I don't agree about your SD statement though. Your right it changes as the bullet expands, but given higher SD with all else being equal, the higher SD'ed one will dig deeper. All copper bullets change that, but for lead cored bullets, including PT's and the bonded bullets, SD's count. But it is only a piece of the overall picture.

 

[Songdog]

I've hunted the rain forests of the Pacific Northwest for years and years.... there ain't anything thicker than that in this country. I never had to snap shoot a deer.... I never had to run a bullet through brush... I guess I'm just a little more selective of shots I guess.

It doesn't apply to long range shots.... or short range shots...... it applies to ALL shots.

I wasn't trying to be a smart ace on the BO/NP thing...... Experience doesn't mean anything..... if it ain't the right experience. A guy could hunt whitetails for 50 years.... does that mean he knows anything about finding a Muley at timberline? Same thing here..... pretty easy for a guy thats shot NPTs his entire life to discount the benefits of high BC bullets..... Pretty easy for a guy who has never shot one to bad mouth an Amax.... because they have no idea what the other side of coin is.

It's easy to discount the benefits of high BC..... until you start shooting them.....

 

[Songdog]

So, how much Sectional Density is required to kill a deer?

How much "energy" does it take to kill a deer?

How much energy does it take to kill a deer with a "hard quartering" (meaning start the bullet in a bad place)?

How much SD for the above shot?

I'm only looking for "perfect scenarios".... I don't need to blaze rounds at every legal critter on the mountain. If I don't have a clean look at lungs, I ain't hitting the switch. I've never felt the need to shipbat stuff I couldn't see, shoot at stuff through stuff, or generally take a shot that requires a "tough" bullet to make it to the vitals. I hunt like a bowhunter, I take bowhunting type shots.... if y'all are into shooting critters wherever you can get a bullet into them..... then yeah, you better pick a good bullet (preferably something incindiary).

 

[JD338]

Song Dog,

No one here has said, to the best of my knowledge, that the A Max is a bad bullet. What they have been saying is that there are options.
There are just too many variables in any given hunting scenario to have just one do all bullet.
We all seem to understand this but you keep insisting on the Hornady .243 cal 105 gr A-Max. Although we do not drink "Company Kool Aid", we are pretty big Nosler fans and we are on the Nosler forum. :idea:

I have taken a lot of game over the years and I have opportunities to take more than the average hunter. Most are killed with a bullet placed with surgical precision BUT there are a few that variables set in and the bullet was off by a few inches. Still a dead and recoveded animal.

SD does have a factor for penetration, but as mentioned the SD changes once the bullet starts to expand.

BC is good IF you shoot long range, higher BC = less drop and less wind drift but it doesn't matter inside 200 yds and most shots in the East are much less than that.

The Pacific NW is indeed thick, but so is a MI Cedar swamp where shots are sometimes measures in feet instead of yards.

The point of all this is that everyones shooting/hunting style is different. It would be good if you could understand that.

Glad the Hornady .243 cal 105 gr A-Max is working well for you. Some of us here will use other options that are available to us.

JD338

 

[rjm158]

It is hard for me to fathom how one topic can create so much dissention among forum members.

It has been noted on other threads that the lack of it, and the general attitude of the forum members, are what attract and keep folks coming back to read and share their input. Opinions are just that, nothing more, and until now members could/would discuss what did or didn't work well for them and recognize that theirs was not the final word on anything and, if need be, agree to disagree and move on.

Songdog, not in any way trying to bash you, but it seems to me you have stated your case to infinity. Your 243/105 Amax combo has worked well for you numerous times on your hunting trips. We get that. What I don't get is why it is so imperative that your choice somehow be recognized at the best. It's not, it's a decision you made based on your research/experience. So be it. I'm truly glad you have had good luck with it and hope you continue to do so.

Why this issue, or any other, has to result in members getting hateful with each other and resorting to personal attacks regarding age, experience, etc., is beyond me. It serves no purpose and only creates an unneeded and unnecessary conflict that needs to stop. If anyone feels the need and absolutely MUST continue their bickering, exchange e-mail addresses. Simple fix.

A moderator stepped in on the other thread to stop this exact situation and his message was crystal clear. It seems silly to think such a thing would have to happen twice on these forums over the same topic when one is not going to convince the other to change their mind. No one person here knows everything and never will. The sharing of experiences is how we learn from each other and we each have to decide if something is right for us or not.

Ron

 

[rjm158]

Sorry, JD, didn't mean to be redundant. I hit the submit button without seeing your post first.

Ron

 

[AzDak42]

If we put as much energy into fighting attacks on the 2A as we do arguing about minutia, we'd all own belt fed MGs.

 

[SJB358]

If we put as much energy into fighting attacks on the 2A as we do arguing about minutia, we'd all own belt fed MGs.

I like where your heads at! Not too much that can't be solved with a properly maintained crew served weapon! :twisted:

 

[onesonek]

I've hunted the rain forests of the Pacific Northwest for years and years.... there ain't anything thicker than that in this country. I never had to snap shoot a deer.... I never had to run a bullet through brush... I guess I'm just a little more selective of shots I guess.

It doesn't apply to long range shots.... or short range shots...... it applies to ALL shots.

I wasn't trying to be a smart ace on the BO/NP thing...... Experience doesn't mean anything..... if it ain't the right experience. A guy could hunt whitetails for 50 years.... does that mean he knows anything about finding a Muley at timberline? Same thing here..... pretty easy for a guy thats shot NPTs his entire life to discount the benefits of high BC bullets..... Pretty easy for a guy who has never shot one to bad mouth an Amax.... because they have no idea what the other side of coin is.

It's easy to discount the benefits of high BC..... until you start shooting them.....

You are absolutely clueless as to my experience!
And don't assume another, or an eastern whitetail hunter don't know how to use a spotting scope, and how to use his feet and stalking skills.
I have been shooting high BC match/target style bullets long before you knew what they were. I still do, and am pretty sure I have thousands more down range than you. At least ,far more than you surmise is certain!
Again, your assumptive arrogance coincides with your self righteousness.

I can't help you take my opinion of the A-Max for a hunting bullet as bad mouthing,,,,,not my intent. I don't need too shoot each and every kind to have an idea of it's performance. This all has been gone over earlier. Why is it, you just feel it necessary to go negative every time, with some other's that differ than your own?

Again JD pretty much covered all, but again I am still sorry it got to this point!!!

 

[Songdog]

Tough to moderate out ignorance and imagination.........

 

[onesonek]

OMG,,,,,,

 

[SJB358]

Tough to moderate out ignorance and imagination.........

SD, why do you go to that? Just wondering? I mean, if your nearly as accomplished a hunter as you say you are, I would think it would be water off a ducks back? Why go that direction mate? Just wondering.

 

[clearwater]

Has anyone tried the Nosler custom comp in .243? Fast twist rifles for hunting or target shooting?

BC .517 and .525.

http://www.nosler.com/bullets/custom-competition.aspx

 

[RiverRider]

Only reason I can come up with for someone to keep on poking a snake with a stick is to get it to strike. It's just entertainment.

 

[onesonek]

Has anyone tried the Nosler custom comp in .243? Fast twist rifles for hunting or target shooting?

BC .517 and .525.

http://www.nosler.com/bullets/custom-competition.aspx

Not in a .243.
I am currently still working with the 105 CC in a 7.5" twist 6mmAI in an XP-100. Many things have gotten in the way, preventing me having this this load work completed so far. It shows promise with better then 1/2 moa at 800, (longest range I can set up locally and with first powder ramp). I think 1/4 moa or better might be possible. Just haven't had the time to run the gamut. I need more time with it,,,and then on to the 107 CC. I certainly don't plan hunting anything with them,,,,,shooting PD's and other digger's, yes.